[Heartlogic-dev] Zaiss's ratings (was Re: meta comment)

[Joshua N Pritikin]

On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 10:02:32PM -0600, William L. Jarrold wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:
> > It is all pretty much at the same priority now.  We just need to
> > resolve the remaining issues and get started with the public.
> 
> Sorry, err, what renaming issues?

Search your inbox for anything from me to which you haven't replied.
If you still can't find anything then I'll resend.

> One more question.  Jim Zaiss told me he saved some comments.  How
> do I get 'em?

Do you have a version 2 ssh key pair?  If not then

  ssh-keygen -t dsa

OK, now email me your public key.  It is typically called "id_dsa.pub"
in the .ssh directory.  Then you will be able to login with:

  ssh address@hidden

Once you login then you can see the database with:

  mysql --host=db78.perfora.net --user=dbo92790426 --password=5WBx4SqA 
--database=db92790426

Or, if you don't want to go through the hassel, then just read them
here:

mysql> select * from rating where expert=7 order by created\G
*************************** 1. row ***************************
      id: 3
  expert: 7
    xref: 12
 created: 20040112194028
      b0: -2
      b1: NULL
      b2: NULL
     why: He got what he wnted so he wouldn't be sad.
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 2. row ***************************
      id: 4
  expert: 7
    xref: 21
 created: 20040112194125
      b0: 0
      b1: NULL
      b2: NULL
     why: Apples and bananas are quite different, even though both are fruit.  
No basis to extrapolate one way or the other.
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 3. row ***************************
      id: 5
  expert: 7
    xref: 43
 created: 20040112194347
      b0: 1
      b1: NULL
      b2: NULL
     why: It's quite possible that what Eric mainly wants is a  ride, in which 
case a train ride is likely to be as good or better than a car ride.
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 4. row ***************************
      id: 6
  expert: 7
    xref: 27
 created: 20040112194705
      b0: -2
      b1: NULL
      b2: NULL
     why: The affect _is_ believable, the "reason" given is absolutety 
irrelevant.  (These two questions should be separated.)
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 5. row ***************************
      id: 7
  expert: 7
    xref: 41
 created: 20040112195033
      b0: -1
      b1: NULL
      b2: NULL
     why: The affect is unlikely.  The reason given is a true statement, but 
does not support the unlikely affect.  (This is another example of why the 
affect and reason questions need to be separated.  It's very unsatisfying to be 
forced to give one rating for both questions together.)
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 6. row ***************************
      id: 8
  expert: 7
    xref: 37
 created: 20040112195715
      b0: -2
      b1: NULL
      b2: NULL
     why: We don't know if Toby got what he wanted or not.  He might have 
wanted OJ earlier in the day, and might have got it then, or not.  Daddy's 
turning on the TV at bedtime (presumably _Toby's_ bedtime) has no clear bearing 
on Toby's desire for OJ, or whether he got any OJ or not.  OTOH, kids tend to 
not like bedtime, so -- for that reason -- it's unlikely thast Toby would be 
happy then.
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 7. row ***************************
      id: 9
  expert: 7
    xref: 33
 created: 20040112195907
      b0: -2
      b1: NULL
      b2: NULL
     why: Tracy's far more likely to be *scared* than sad, as kids tend to fear 
mummies, bespeckled or otherwise.
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 8. row ***************************
      id: 10
  expert: 7
    xref: 5
 created: 20040112200118
      b0: -1
      b1: NULL
      b2: NULL
     why: The affect is unlikely.  The reason given is true, and makes it 
likely that Tracie is happy.  (Assuming thast she wants the apple right before 
lunch -- which is not clear from the description.)
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 9. row ***************************
      id: 11
  expert: 7
    xref: 51
 created: 20040112200457
      b0: -2
      b1: NULL
      b2: NULL
     why: Again, we don't know _when_ Toby wanted the OJ.  The given affect 
(sad) is implausible, and the given reason, while true, does not support that 
affect.
(It would at best be a neutral reason with respect to a claimed affect of 
"happy".)
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 10. row ***************************
      id: 12
  expert: 7
    xref: 55
 created: 20040112200627
      b0: -1
      b1: -2
      b2: -2
     why:
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 11. row ***************************
      id: 13
  expert: 7
    xref: 12
 created: 20040112201418
      b0: -2
      b1: 2
      b2: -2
     why: The "believability of the reason" is ambiguous between (a) the 
likelihood of the reason, qua statement, being _true_, given the scenario and 
(b) the degree of support (evidence/justification) the reason, if true, would 
provide for truth of the stated affect, given the scenario.   It'd be better to 
separate these questions.
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 12. row ***************************
      id: 14
  expert: 7
    xref: 37
 created: 20040112201646
      b0: -1
      b1: 0
      b2: -2
     why: We don't really know if Toby got OJ when he wanted it or not.  OTOH, 
kids like TV.  OTOOH, kids dislike bedtime.  Too many variables enter into this 
one.
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 13. row ***************************
      id: 15
  expert: 7
    xref: 44
 created: 20040112202115
      b0: 0
      b1: 1
      b2: -2
     why: I'm not sure how to judge the believability of the affect and the 
reason together when their separate
levels of believability diverge.  The instructions don't make it clear, and 
neither does common sense.
 cue_err:
appr_err:
*************************** 14. row ***************************
      id: 16
  expert: 7
    xref: 40
 created: 20040112202130
      b0: -2
      b1: -2
      b2: -2
     why:
 cue_err:
appr_err:
14 rows in set (0.01 sec)

Hrm, we probably need a script (or web page) to browse the ratings
people enter.  It's pretty tough to read raw database records,
especially with the free-form appraisals.

BTW, address@hidden (dunno who that is) entered one
rating:

mysql> select * from rating where expert=6\G
*************************** 1. row ***************************
      id: 17
  expert: 6
    xref: 16
 created: 20040112211353
      b0: -1
      b1: NULL
      b2: NULL
     why: The attention Tracy gets from mom is not a factor in Tracy's 
immediate responce to getting an apple instead of a banana.
 cue_err:
appr_err:
1 row in set (0.00 sec)

-- 
A new cognitive theory of emotion, http://www.nongnu.org/heartlogic